Peter Cairns Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 I also recently read something about the UK looking at a diesel electric option, with the main engine feeding power to eight electric motors one at each wheel. Apparently like US trucks that use a similiar system, if gives better economy, is more reliable and better off road performance. I am not sure if that if for the "Boxer" or for a later version or an alternative. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 The diesel electric is a General Dynamics technology offering for FRES (Future Rapid Effects System, a replacement for the Saxon, remaining FV432 and CVR(T) fleets) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 The US fooled around with a hybrid Humvee a number of years ago. Each wheel had a pancake electric motor, which allowed the vehicle to do zero radius turns. Reduced heat signature, nearly silent running, lower maintainence, etc. Problem is that the weight of the batteries and motors made the vehicle tactically impractical from all but a light recon mission. Operational range was also an issue. Apparently they have started looking at it again. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 Have you heard about the new USMC recon vehicle? Its diesel/electric 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 The diesel electric idea gets round the battery problem, as the are too heavy and fuel cells to expense so far. However a big weight saving with the system is that you don't need a transmission or drive shafts, which are not only heavy but a bugger to repair in the field. Looking to the future their are two technologies that although still very much in the lab could combine to radically change things. Growing organic crystals that act like silicone for chips is progressing slowly, but we already have some types of plastic chip and plastic VDU screens. Of more importance is the growing effectiveness of plastic batteries, layered polymers that can store a charge. The second line of technology is plastic armour, making vehicles out of the likes of Kevlar as opposed to aluminium or steel. If (and as of now it's a big if) you can bring these two technologies together then you get an APC, with light weight plastic armour which is also the vehicles power source. This means not only do you save weight, but space too as you don't have the engine, which gives you more options on internal layout. It also greatly reduces the risk from fire, and if you read my post a while back on the subject is well suited to integrate, electric armour. Iam not sure if a plastic armour APC, would be any more bouyant than a conventional one. I had always though that this would be a good basis for vehicles in a near future CM:SLoD. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 slightly off topic, but while surfing the net looking for Vietnam stuff, I came across these photos: Marines fighting in Hue, february 1968, which was pure urban fighting. Marine in the trenches at Con Thien, september 1967. You will notice that even back then, U.S. forces went into battle with personal body armour, in this case flak vests. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucero1148 Posted November 5, 2005 Author Share Posted November 5, 2005 body armor really has come a long way since then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Btw. why are they 'flak' jackets? Were they worn by bomber crews? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Flak jackets protect against flying shrapnell, wood and metal splinters. It has nothing to do with being on a bomber crew Troops only recently started wearing bulletproof armor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 The name was generalized from the bomber crews who started wearing them latter in the war. Like M1 says, body armor was ment to stop fragments which is what you got from flak. Till recently actual bulletproof vests were way to heavy for everyday use. [ November 05, 2005, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: sgtgoody (esq) ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: Flak jackets protect against flying shrapnell, wood and metal splinters. It has nothing to do with being on a bomber crew Troops only recently started wearing bulletproof armor Flak jackets actually did originate in WWII as fragmentation protection for bomber crews. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 I know about that, but since then they served other troops. Some Army National units still dont have body armor, and use flak jackets 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: Flak jackets protect against flying shrapnell, wood and metal splinters.I've worn one so I know their function very well. But in Finnish we call them "shrapnel vests", which made me curious about the English language designation. Thanks for the answers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 The other common name used for non-bullet proof protection vests are "frag vests", as in "fragmentation vests". Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Horse Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Originally posted by panzerwerfer42: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: Flak jackets protect against flying shrapnell, wood and metal splinters. It has nothing to do with being on a bomber crew Troops only recently started wearing bulletproof armor Flak jackets actually did originate in WWII as fragmentation protection for bomber crews. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucero1148 Posted November 6, 2005 Author Share Posted November 6, 2005 The Japanese army during WWII tried to make a bullet proof vest but it was poorly designed. It was very similar to a steel cuirass but I think the plate was cast iron. Heavy and not capable of stopping .30 cal from a carbine or a .45. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 The British had bullet proof vests in WWII as well. But they just weren't practical. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 The same with Soviets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munter Posted November 8, 2005 Share Posted November 8, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: The same with Soviets. Russian shields captured during the Winter War. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.